Project 2025: A Recipe For Environmental Destruction

What would a second term for Donald Trump mean for the environment? The cornerstone of it would be a drill, baby, drill policy. Or, as the Republican National Convention Platform 2024 proclaims, “Make America the dominant energy producer in the world, by far.”

That shouldn’t come as a surprise. According to Open Secrets, Trump received $951,902 in campaign contributions from oil and gas companies in the 2024 election.

Add deregulation and promoting or funding anything environmentally friendly to the agenda. “Cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations,” as the RNC Platform says.

Project 2025 and the EPA

Beyond the RNC Platform, we have the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 document to inform us. The introduction to the section on the Environmental Protection Agency sounds a bit Orwellian with its claims to create “a better environmental tomorrow with clean air, safe water, healthy soil, and thriving communities.”

Project 2025 recommends that former President Trump issue an executive order on day one to reconsider the EPA’s structure that would:

  • Stop all grants to advocacy groups.
  • Downsize the EPA by firing all the newest hires in “low-value programs” and find opportunities to relocate Senior Executive Service positions.
  • Find ways to cut costs by reducing the number of full-time equivalent positions and not conducting any activity that does not have “clear and current congressional authorization.”

More Power For Local and State Governments

Deregulation is the backbone of Project 2025, which states that the EPA’s structure should “reflect the principles of cooperative federalism and limited government.” Doing so will mean “significant restructuring and streamlining of the federal agency, which gives local and state governments “the primary role in making choices about the environment.”

However, California would have less ability to regulate the environment. Under the Clean Air Act, the Golden State is allowed to obtain a waiver of the preemption that prohibits states from enacting emissions standards for new vehicles. The EPA would apply the waiver to “California-specific issues like ground-level ozone, not global climate issues.” In other words, California would not be allowed to use the waiver for vehicle greenhouse gas standards.

More Air Pollution

There would be less regulation of air pollution and no regulation of greenhouse gases. The Trump administration would review the regulations enacted under the Good Neighbor Program/Interstate Pollutant Transport program by President Biden to ensure they “do not overcontrol upwind states.” The program’s expansion beyond power plants would be reversed. Climate change would become a dirty word, and regulating greenhouse gases would be a thing of the past. The administration would remove the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) for any source category that is not already regulated.

Less Regulation of Superfund Site Clean-Up

The EPA would revise groundwater regulations and policies for Superfund sites “to reflect the challenges of omnipresent contaminants like PFAS.” That would include revisiting the designation of PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances. PFAS stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. They resist grease, oil, water, and heat. They are widely used chemicals. Exposure to certain types of PFAS is associated with serious health effects, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

Reduce Research and Development

Research and development are crucial to developing new technologies that can help reduce GHG emissions. Under the Trump administration, any ongoing or planned R&D would be put on hold if there is “not clear and current congressional authorization.” The writers of Project 2025 know that it is hard to get Congress to pass any legislation. They know that by implementing this recommendation, many EPA projects will stop.

Public Scrutiny of Science

Perhaps one of the strangest recommendations is to embrace citizen science and “ deputize the public to subject the agency’s science to greater scrutiny.” That would mean that the general public, instead of experts in their scientific fields, would look at data analysis, identify scientific flaws, and catch research misconduct. This is just another way to gut environmental protections and let industry run amok, polluting our air, water, and land.

The Department of Energy and Project 2025

Project 2025 would also deregulate the Department of Energy while prioritizing fossil fuels. The introduction to the section recommends ending government interference in energy decisions and ending the war on oil and natural gas. That means scrubbing any mention of climate change and approving all oil and gas projects. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) would favor fossil fuel energy.

Project 2025 recommends eliminating energy efficiency standards for appliances and all applied energy programs. National efficiency standards for appliances saved American consumers $63 billion in 2015 alone. According to the DOE, cumulative operating cost savings from all appliance standards since 1987 will total almost $2 trillion by 2030.

Paint It Blue

There is a solution if Project 2025 horrifies you. Vote blue in November. Vote for the politicians who believe in climate change, fund renewable energy, and protect the environment. There has never been a time in American history when the nation’s two main political parties have had more different environmental agendas. Put those in office who will ensure the Heritage Foundation’s plan ends up in the dustbin of history.

Gina-Marie Cheeseman
Gina-Marie Cheesemanhttp://www.justmeans.com/users/gina-marie-cheeseman
Gina-Marie Cheeseman, freelance writer/journalist/copyeditor about.me/gmcheeseman Twitter: @gmcheeseman

Get in Touch

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Related Articles

Stay in touch

To be updated with the latest climate and environmental news and commentary. Learning to live in the Anthropocene.

2,600FansLike
121FollowersFollow
1,832FollowersFollow

Latest Posts